The current dispute over public sector collective bargaining in Wisconsin has helped me forget that the Packers won the Super Bowl but a few short weeks ago. For that, I'm thankful. I hate those Packers.
I don't know what the future holds for this Wisconsin issue, or whether it will transcend borders into other states. It raises some good questions, though.
I think most people understand that collective bargaining began in an era of horrible working conditions, where unions protected the safety and economic security of private sector employers whose singular focus on the bottom line was actually dangerous to employees.
Those days are long since passed. And, I think this is reflected by the fact that private sector unionization has dropped dramatically over the past forty years.
With those thoughts it mind it is unclear to me why public sector unionization remains so prevalent. From whom exactly are public sector unions protecting their membership? From government, which would otherwise treat its employees unfairly? Really?
The unionization issue is often framed as an issue of cost--i.e. the wages and benefits of employees represented by a union become unsustainable, especially in today's economy.
I don't know if the cost issue is correct, or not. Even if correct, I place equal blame on those in management who agreed to unsustainable wage and benefits.
My opposition to public sector unionization, however, is not based on wages and benefits--it's based on the concepts of tenure and seniority.
Most Americans work, and always have, in jobs where their success or failure is directly proportional to their effort and skill. This is an intrinsically fair system which reflects the principles upon which our country was founded.
Can this capitalistic system create occasional results which seem unfair? Sure, it can. But to me the far greater danger is the systemic malaise which can be caused by a system in which effort and skill are not the most important criterion to continued employment.
No comments:
Post a Comment